As I know the Ticos have problem with their superstructure. Too huge superstructure and sometimes they suffer unstability problems. The same happens with Slavas. On the other hand Burkes have perfect shape and more normal superstructure. I dont know where is the problem with DDG 51. Why USN officials are such DDG 51 haters? DDG 1000s ARE NOT warships they are “monitors”. At the battle between DDG 51 and DDG 1000 I wish 51 to be the winner.

Who says America is limited to only having North Korea and Iran as its enemys and that current allies can not switch sides in the future? Also what about the traditional enemys that are The Soviet Uni, sorry Russia and China, do they somehow not count?

As I know China and Russia are not a threat anymore. No ship of China is more powerful than a DDG-51. Only 2 type 52C destroyers, approaching the technology and the firepower of a DDG-51. But even these 2 have the half VLS tubes of DDG-51. You have 62 of them and China only 2 and much weaker.
As for Russia only 4 vessels (and I wish 5 if ever Nakhimov returns back) have the capabilities of CG 47/ DDG-51s. These are the single Kirov Peter the Great and the 3 Slavas. So you have 62 + 22 = 84 they have only 4! Also note that Medvedev is very liberal and you have nothing affraid from Russia.

At my point of view Burges are perfect hulls. For me an 50% larger version of Burge will be perfect. I don’t know why USN wants to return to “monitor” era. Why DDG 1000 should be such a stealthy. For a war against Iran lol!! Iran has 2 generation fighters 3 Kilos SSNs and 3 old , about 40 years old, British built corvetes. As for North Korea, they have WWI technology, and you can shoot down their missiles even by using Nike Hercules from museums!! So why the navy needs this awful floating box?
My proposal is an enlarger version of main DDG-51 hull about 285 m long and 15000t tonage.

1. If Long Beach was the last real cruiser do you know why terminated the hole project in one unit only? She was perfect platform and even VLS could be installed on it, in latter modernization programs, replacing the Terrier launchers.

2. Do you know if in mid 70s were plans for a new huge missile cruiser the (CSGN1)? Some naval experts say that Soviets realy inspired from this plan and they developed their “Kirov” class.

3. Is possible at the future to see a nuclear powered CG(X)?

Actually, a cruiser, is a vessel capable of acting independed or escorting carriers and battleships (in older times). So this vessel have 2 roles, and for that she should be armed for 4 dimentional war. (Antiair, antiship, ASW, and land attack). The older vessels like Virginia, or California classes are cruisers, as well as Ticos. A vessel with length of 171 m and 10000t maximum tonnage has the size of WWII light cruiser. All the other classes, like Beinbridge, Truxtun, Leahy etc are DDGs, and no doubt for that.
Back to our agenta:

I am shipmodeler, and I wish DDG-1000 to be cancelled. I can’t imagine a 1:350 kit of “Zumhalt”, would be just a floating box!! Anyway.. Arleigh Burges are perfect vessels, and is very easy to enlarge them. I ve seen from fas.org some early pictures of the ex SC-21 and later DD-21. The development of the hole project started by trying to make DDG-51 bigger and stealthier. Here is an early image of the later DDG-1000. This althought is too stealth is much better than the ugly DDG-1000

What I’m more interested is what they will cook up with the Yasen boats!

I hope Kh – 101s land attack cruise missiles, and Onyx anti-ship missiles.

Rav3n, I think that you posted the “Admiral Lazarev” twice.

Sorry my friends but all of you are against me when I ask questions for modernization of Kirovs. I insist to my opinion. Why we talk too much for Yakhonts? Yakhont is just a antiship missile, but the fact is that the Kirov class is too large. That means the capability to carry large amount of missiles. Just keep in mind Ticoderoga has length 172m and beam 17,4m, when Kirov class has length 252m and beam 28m, 10 meters more than Ticoderoga. What I want to say is to just imagine how many tomahawks a Kirov could carry!! And if you remove the 130mm gun from the back and just put cells that vessel could possibly carry up to 200 cruise missiles. That means an arsenal ship. So if Akula class SSN carries the Granat cruise missile I dont understand why Admiral Nakhimov is not armed with SS-N-21s. The best option should be a universal VLS for both Yakhonts and cruise missiles. With cruise missiles the Kirovs could be strategic platforms in the future.